Gujarat High Court to initiate contempt case against district judge for comments on HC judge

The Gujarat High Court recently recommended initiation of contempt of court proceedings against a suspended additional district judge for stating that a senior High Court judge has “control of his junior judges” [Giriishkumar Rameshchandra Soni v High Court Gujarat Through Registrar General]

Additional District Judge GR Soni, who was suspended in December 2024, is facing allegations of developing an intimate relationship with an outsourced clerk and extending financial help to her. It is also alleged that he had got a CCTV camera blocked, and failed to regularly hold Court.  

Hearing Soni’s petition challenging the department inquiry, a Bench of Justice NS Sanjay Gowda and Justice JL Odedra on May 8 took a strong view of the written submission filed by Soni.

In his submissions, Soni alleged that a senior judge of the High Court was exercising control over junior judges.

“He is asserting that a senior judge of this Court has good control over all the branches of the High Court and it is his belief that this senior judge is capable of instructing or directing his junior judges,” the Court noted.

It opined that this statement scandalizes and lowers the authority of the Court.

“This would also amount to an act which tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceedings and also tends to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner. In other words, these assertions clearly constitute a criminal contempt,” the Court said.  

Therefore, the Bench directed that the matter be placed before the Division Bench hearing contempt of court matters for consideration of initiation of criminal contempt proceedings. Soni has been directed to remain present before that Division Bench on June 15.

Pertinently, counsel representing Soni told the Court that the written submissions were filed by Soni without instructions or advice by the lawyers.

Considering Soni’s plea on merits, the Court rejected the argument that there should be a complaint in a prescribed manner or that a complaint should be accompanied by an affidavit or that there should be verifiable material before initiation of an inquiry.

Soni had argued that an inquiry against a judicial officer can be initiated only if there was a written complaint accompanied by an affidavit with verifiable materials

However, the Court said that the only requirement for the exercise of this power by the disciplinary authority is the formation of an opinion by it.

On the guidelines that require complaints against judicial officers be accompanied by a sworn affidavit, the Court said:

“This requirement, issued in the form of a guideline, in relation to complaints by litigants against the judicial officers will have no application whatsoever in respect of the cases where the Disciplinary Authority has formed an opinion that there are good and sufficient reasons to initiate a disciplinary inquiry against a judicial officer.”

The Court added that the disciplinary authority in respect of the judicial officer is the high court headed by the Chief Justice.

The Court also said the argument regarding the vagueness of charge cannot be entertained at this stage when the inquiry is already in progress. 

Soni had earlier moved the Supreme Court for transfer of the inquiry to an independent and impartial senior judge or to any other judge of any High Court other than the Gujarat High Court. However, that plea was withdrawn on January 12.

Senior Advocate Percy Kavina with advocate Bhargav Hasurkar represented Soni.

Senior Counsel Gautam Joshi with advocate Vikas V Nair appeared for the High Court.

[Read Judgment]